Polk v. Lattimore et al

Filing 139

ORDER Disregarding Defendant's 138 Opposition signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 04/16/2021.(Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SUSAN MAE POLK,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:12-cv-01156-DAD-BAM (PC)
ORDER DISREGARDING DEFENDANT’S
OPPOSITION

v.
(ECF No. 138)
LATTIMORE, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff Susan Mae Polk (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

18

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on

19

Plaintiff’s fifth amended complaint against Defendant Baron for retaliation in violation of the

20

First Amendment and deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

21
22

On April 12, 2021, Defendant Baron filed a document titled “Defendant’s Opposition to
Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel [ECF No. __.]” (ECF No. 138.)

23

As the Court has not received any motion for appointment of counsel from Plaintiff,

24

Defendant has not referenced a specific docket entry where such a request was made, and nothing

25

else in Defendant’s filing indicates that the Court should expect to receive such a motion in the

26

near future, Defendant’s opposition is disregarded as premature. Should such a motion be

27

docketed in the future, Defendant is free to renew and re-file the opposition, if necessary.

28

However, Defendant is discouraged from prematurely filing oppositions before the corresponding
1

1
2
3

motion is docketed by the Court.
Accordingly, Defendant’s opposition, (ECF No. 138), is HEREBY DISREGARDED as
premature.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

April 16, 2021

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2